archive

October 12, 2009

Pathetic, useless

On page 9 in the Hindustan Times yesterday (Sunday Oct 11), I found this nugget from an interview with Raj Thackeray, referring to "outsiders" coming to Bombay to live:

"But why can't they hold their local politicians responsible for the pathetic situation in their states? What about those useless leaders in their states who have failed to create employment there? It is their failure for which we are suffering here."

All right. Two reactions.

1) On page 11 in the same paper, I read this: "According to the Mumbai Human Development Report 2009 prepared by the National Resource Centre for Urban Poverty ... most of Mumbai's migrants are not from the north, but from other, neglected parts of Maharashtra ... Maharashtra accounts for 37.4 per cent of the city's migrant population."

(Clearly that word "most" really should have read "the largest fraction", but the point remains).

What should we conclude from that 37.4 per cent? Going by Raj Thackeray's logic, such as it is, we should conclude that the "local politicians [of Maharashtra] are responsible for the pathetic situation" in Maharashtra. That Maharashtra has "useless leaders who have failed to create employment". Etc.

2) By a rough calculation, there are about 120,000 Maharashtrians living in the US. (See this comment for how I came up with that number. Others in Australia, the UK, South Africa, etc, but let's focus just on the US). All of these Maharashtrians emigrated from this state in search of a better life.

What should we conclude from this number? Again, going by Raj Thackeray's logic, we should conclude that they emigrated because Maharashtra's "local politicians are responsible for the pathetic situation" in Maharashtra. That Maharashtra has "useless leaders who have failed to create employment". Etc.

Are these conclusions valid? And if so, who are the leaders and politicians he is referring to, especially considering he is a leader and a politician himself?

16 comments:

Sapathan
said...

You want to have an argument with a politician from Shiv Sena on logic?

And even if you are, for reasons most of us do not understand, aren't the numbers you are throwing absolutely irrelevant? I'd expect someone making an argument against the Shiv Sena to possibly come up with data on the net inflow/ outflow of population due to migration/immigration. I don't know what those numbers are and maybe they are not even in your favor. Maybe they are. But if you want to continue this illogical argument with the Shiv Sena, that is the number you are looking for. Not those you have thrown about.

He isn't from the SS, but never mind -- he was once, and the Sena puts forward the same arguments.

Never mind.

This post says "Maharashtra accounts for 37.4 per cent of the city's migrant population". That's not relevant data? To combat the notion he's spreading, that Mah is being overrun by "outsiders", that's not relevant data?

Besides, I've offered net migration figures plenty of times, for example here. In short, the truth is that migration is a small contributor to the city's growth. (And non-Maharashtrian migration, a fraction of that).

But the real argument against this stuff, that I wish the various TV hosts had asked, is what I allude to in point 2 above: should the same logic not apply to Maharashtrians in the US (for example)? Is their emigration in search of a better life a commentary on the pathetic state of Maharashtra?

To elaborate, if anything, people migrating to America from an Indian territory actually makes that place "better governed". Simply because education is possibly the single biggest factor that decides this migration pattern.

The calculation is totally wrong.They haven't considered migrations in Thane, Navi Mumbai.Maharashtra Government report indicates that there are only 27% Marathis left in Mumbai. Marathi Language is almost vanishing from Mumbai. It has also been indicated in that report that, out of the total population of Maharashtra(around 11 crore, only 67% people speak Marathi language. Whereas, in Kerala 96% people speak Malayalam, In Tamilnadu, Karnatak, Andhra the number of native language speakers is above 84%. This report clearly indicates that Marathi language is in trouble in Maharashtra. Only a native Marathi Manoos can save it and I don't think, any outsider will contribute to prevent Marathi language from vanishing. Moreover,since Mumbai belongs to Maharashtra and whatever its development happened in the past is because of Maharashtrians I think Marathis have the right to come to Mumabai and it is just 'Shifting' from one place to another and it can't be considered as a 'True Migration'.

The logic is not flawed. All migrations happen in search of a better life. Reason why Maharashtrians and other Indians migrate to the US is also the same. The crappy governance of local politicians and social apathy of the populace towards such governance and for each other is responsible.Raj Thackreys hate politics reek of more of this apathy towards the people of Mumbai

"The logic is not flawed. All migrations happen in search of a better life"

That is not true except on a purely semantic level. Migrations of obscenely typically forward class Maharashtrians to the US might be for a better life but most migration in India is practically coerced either under pretext of development, progress, agrobusiness or other such things that parents of the Indian American migrants and their minions initiate, endorse and fiercely advocate.

There is this small little snobbish township known as Pandurangwadi in Goregaon (East), Mumbai. People like you i.e "educated, intelligent" will call people living there as "Middle class, well educated" ..hell.. as A.K.S Swaminathan Iyer says (referring to himself) "once socialist but who wasn't".

Most young kids in this little township have gone to the US for higher studies and are working there ('legally', if that makes one happy). Mostly everyone reads Times of India/Indian Express/DNA along with Maharashtra Times/ Loksatta and other such "secular openminded" papers which are not (obvious) mouthpieces of Shiv Sena or MNS.

Well in the last elections 3000/4000 votes of these small, educated, intelligent people, "holding high posts" voted for Shiv Sena.

"since Mumbai belongs to Maharashtra and whatever its development happened in the past is because of Maharashtrians I think Marathis have the right to come to Mumabai and it is just 'Shifting' from one place to another and it can't be considered as a 'True Migration'"

Why can it not be:"Since Mumbai us belongs to India and whatever development happened in the past is because of Indians, I think Indians have the right to come to Mumbai and it is just 'shifting' from one place to another and it can't be considered as a 'True Migration'

but most migration in India is practically coerced either under pretext of development, progress, agrobusiness or other such things that parents of the Indian American migrants and their minions initiate, endorse and fiercely advocate.Sorry fail to understand this. No pwnage required, just explain more clearly what you are trying to say